Eko Trust: Contract Register & Procurement Profile

Companies House: PRI/LBG/NSC (Private, Limited by guarantee, no share capital, use of 'Limited' exemption)Greater LondonPlaistow

Companies House10279605 ↗Websiteekotrust.org.uk ↗

Open now0no live notices
i

Tenders you can still bid for.

Notices at tender stage whose deadline has not passed, counted the way the search counts them: a notice shows under every code and region it names.

Notices, last 12 months0-100% vs prior 12 months (2)
i

Notices published in the last 12 months.

Counted per tender, not per lot, against the 12 months before where shown.

Typical bids per lot30% single-bid · 3 bid reports
i

How many companies usually bid when this buyer runs a tender.

Middle value of the bid counts on its award notices, one per lot. Only real competitions count: direct awards and framework places are left out.

Based on 3 lots from this buyer’s competitions, last 24 months. Small sample.

Last 24 months, all categories.

Published award value, 24m£3.0mnet · on 3 of 3 published values · top 5 = 100%
i

How much this buyer has awarded recently, by published values.

Sum of published VAT-exclusive awards to single suppliers, last 24 months. Left out: concession revenue, framework ceilings, repeated notices, equal-value duplicates.

Published values, not actual spend. The biggest rows are listed so you can check.

What they buy
i

What kind of work is bought here.

Notices by procurement category (CPV). A notice with several categories counts in each.

Last 24 months · CPV divisions on published procedures · a notice with several divisions counts in each

How they buy
i

How work here is packaged.

Notices by commercial tool: a single contract, a framework, or a dynamic purchasing system.

Last 24 months · 2 notices · commercial tool and route as published on the notice, not a legal-regime claim

Commercial tool
i

How work here is packaged.

Notices by commercial tool: a single contract, a framework, or a dynamic purchasing system.

  • Contract100%(2 notices)
    2 of 2 notices are Contract (100%).
Procedure route
i

Which procedures buyers here use.

Notices by the procedure they declare: open, selective, limited or direct. Open and selective are competitions; limited and direct are not.

  • Selective100%(2 notices)
    2 of 2 notices are Selective (100%).
Typical bids per lot
i

How many companies usually bid when this buyer runs a tender.

Middle value of the bid counts on its award notices, one per lot. Only real competitions count: direct awards and framework places are left out.

Based on 3 lots from this buyer’s competitions, last 24 months. Small sample.

Last 24 months, all categories.

3moderate · n=30% of lots drew a single bid

Who wins here
i

Which suppliers win the most here.

Suppliers ranked by the number of tenders won, not by money. A supplier on one big framework with many call-offs does not outrank one that won many separate competitions.

All published awards naming a supplier · ranked by distinct procedures, not pounds · panel and call-off entries inflate award records

SupplierProceduresShareLast 24mAward recordsLast activity
ACCELERATE CLEANING SOLUTIONS LTD116.7%11—
TURN IT ON LIMITED116.7%11—
Julius Rutherfoord & Co Ltd116.7%11—
The Pantry Catering (UK) Ltd116.7%02—
HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT LIMITED116.7%01—
Liquid Personnel Limited116.7%01—
JDS Recruitment116.7%01—
EPPH Ltd116.7%01—

6 awarded procedures across 12 suppliers: too few to describe concentration.

Published award value (24m)
i

How much this buyer has awarded recently, by published values.

Sum of published VAT-exclusive awards to single suppliers, last 24 months. Left out: concession revenue, framework ceilings, repeated notices, equal-value duplicates.

Published values, not actual spend. The biggest rows are listed so you can check.

£3.0mSum of published VAT-exclusive values on 3 of 3 published single-supplier values; the five largest make 100%.
Typical single-supplier award (24m)
i

The middle published award value for this buyer.

Middle value of the same awards as the total above.

Last 24 months.

£734k middle valuemoderate · n=3Middle half £585k–£1.3m.
Largest published awards
i

The biggest published awards.

Awards to a single supplier with a published value, largest first, so you can check the totals against the notice.

A repeated framework total can appear here. Open the notice to check.

SupplierAwardedTermPublished value
London sitesJulius Rutherfoord & Co Ltd——£1,788,412 †
Eko Trust - IT Support ServicesTURN IT ON LIMITED——£733,800 †
Suffolk sitesACCELERATE CLEANING SOLUTIONS LTD——£436,741 †

Recent procedures

Latest 6 of 6 procedures where this authority buys, is the authority the work is for, or runs the procurement

ProcedureStatusPublishedPublished value
Eko Trust - IT Support ServicesIT services: consultingAwarded / complete12 Aug 2025—
Eko Trust - Invitation to Tender for Building Cleaning Services3 lotsBuilding-cleaning servicesAwarded / complete6 Aug 2025—
Eko Trust - M&E Maintenance & Compliance Services4 lotsElectrical servicesAwarded / complete30 Sept 2024—
Eko Trust - Invitation to Tender for Agency Staffing FrameworkSupply services of personnel including temporary staffAwarded / complete12 Sept 2023—
Eko Trust - Invitation to tender for a Managed Payroll ServicePayroll management servicesAwarded / complete12 Apr 2023—
Eko Trust - Outsourced Catering Services4 lotsCanteen servicesAwarded / complete22 Jun 2022—

Search all 6 procedures for this authority →

About this data
  • Source. Official UK public procurement notices (Find a Tender), reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. New notices arrive through the day; the figures are rebuilt nightly.
  • One profile per authority. Different spellings and registration numbers of the same body are merged into this profile. It includes tenders the authority ran for other bodies and tenders run on its behalf; spend is credited to the body that pays.
  • Values are published values. Award values are what the authority published, excluding VAT and framework ceilings. They are not a budget or total spend.
  • Contract end dates. 0 of 9 published contracts state an end date; those feed “Contracts ending”.
  • Every figure shows what it rests on. Not every notice publishes a bid count, a value or a delivery region, so each figure carries the number of records behind it, and one built on few records is marked as such. The on a figure explains it; the counting rules are in the methodology. Spotted something wrong? Tell us.